The Environment and the Economy          

The Environment and the Economy

Our economy has relied on growth and consumerism for quite some time now.  A society has been built full of consumers to provide a basis with which to keep profits high, and when they do go down, to expand by increasing production. Maintaining this system comes at a price, though. Not only has our environment been seriously degraded, but the rates of diseases, including cancer, are on the rise. Only 10% of cancers are hereditary, so one can postulate that the other 90% must be attributed to various environmental factors which are due to releases of toxic chemicals into nearby waterways by corporations to, once again, keep profits high. The focus, from the government as well as non-profit groups, has been to find a cure for cancer rather than preventing it from occurring in the first place, thereby increasing the expenditure of resources. Preventing these negative human health and environmental impacts would mean changing our entire social and economic system. However, there is hope that this can happen in the future.

The common belief in economics is that if the economy is in a recession, simply growing more will fix things (Bekaert & Engstrom, 2017). For example, reducing poverty can be achieved by growing the economy or increasing the production of goods and services so that consumers will spend more, and wealth will trickle down. Unfortunately, these theories are void in a finite world. We cannot continue to grow economically if we are to conserve the planet as well. To continue to thrive as a species, we must transition to a sustainable economy, one in which much less is pollutants are released.

After the rise of the Industrial Revolution, the idea came about that public welfare could best be promoted by encouraging industrial growth, resulting in a change in property law and the system of economic incentives by which it provides. Public land used increased tremendously, with things like dams, mills, factories, and canals. When fires or floods occurred, the pre-industrial common law imposed strict liability that prevented many new industries from growing. Eventually, the law was changed so that economic interests were incorporated into the law.  Because of this major change, many modern environmental laws mirror these modern common laws, thus allowing us to put the economy and its growth ahead of the environment and human health.

Carbon tax and carbon dividends are examples of sectors where the economy and the environment relate. Economists argue that without a proper policy on harmful gas emissions, there will be no incentives from manufacturers and householders to control harmful gas emissions into the atmosphere (Bekaert & Engstrom, 2017). The carbon tax is the best method to control the emission of harmful gas into the environment. This is because the carbon tax can cut across all emitters from large scale to small scale emitters. Second, the government can easily put in place measures to ensure no one evades carbon tax, by ensuring the policy is in place and active. The tax policy does not require much of government planning and strategizing time since the policy is apparent to all carbon consumers.  The production is highly depended on carbon products, and as the productions become expensive, the manufactures will tend to move on greener energy that is more cost-effective. The companies buying gas emission quotas may not spend all the quotas, which makes it difficult for the government to measure the price of gas emitted. The business merchandise can cheat the government on the amount of gas emitted by buying fewer quotas, whereas they pollute more than their limit (US EPA, OA, 2016).The carbon tax is an ideal policy that can be implemented easily to control harmful gases into the atmosphere.

Another thing is that cap-and-trade lead to the creation of a business in selling and buying of quotas among the companies in manufacturing.  The companies that exhaust their quotas first end up buying an extension cup from another company. The buying and selling of gas emission quotas may affect the focus on producing less harmful gas to the environment (Case, 2017).Another thing is that the government may not use the revenue generated via the selling of gas emission quotas for investment in greener energy; this is because the price of gas emitted is not certain compared to that of the carbon tax.

In a world where economic growth is put before environmental and human health risks, a collapse is evident. We simply cannot continue to exploit resources and produce waste in such high quantities without consequences. This can change, though if we change the perception of the common people is changed. Preventing these negative human health and environmental impacts would mean changing our entire social and economic system. However, there is hope that this can happen in the future.